The US Supreme Court ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not allow a president to impose sweeping global tariffs. The decision states Donald Trump exceeded his authority by using an emergency law meant for national crises.
The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled against President Donald Trump’s power to impose tariffs, declaring that his use of emergency authority to levy broad tariffs on US trading partners was unlawful.
The US court has ruled 6-3 against Trump’s sweeping global tariffs, saying the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not allow a president to impose such tariffs. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh dissented. Reporters noted one box of opinions was released, signalling multiple decisions.
Scroll to load tweet…
Court says emergency law cannot be used for tariffs
In its major decision, the US Supreme Court ruled that Donald Trump did not have the legal power to impose sweeping global tariffs using an emergency law. The court said the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a law meant for national emergencies, does not allow a president to set tariffs.
The ruling is seen as a strong check on presidential authority in trade matters. It clarifies that emergency economic powers cannot be stretched to cover broad tariff actions affecting global commerce.
What the ruling says
According to the court’s opinion, the emergency law allows the president to regulate certain international transactions during a national crisis, but it does not authorise tariffs. By using that law to impose wide-ranging trade duties, the administration went beyond what Congress permitted.
The judgment followed arguments heard by the justices in November. Legal experts say the decision could shape how future presidents use emergency powers in economic policy.
Trump defends tariffs
Before the ruling, Trump strongly defended his tariff policy while speaking at an event in the US state of Georgia. He argued that tariffs protect the economy and claimed that without them, “everybody would be bankrupt”.
He insisted that he had the right to set tariffs as president and said the legal wording supported his actions. Trump also expressed frustration over the time taken by the court to issue its decision, saying he had been “waiting forever” for the outcome.
US Supreme Court weighs future of Voting Rights Act
Another closely watched ruling from the US Supreme Court concerns the future of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which bans electoral maps that weaken the voting power of minority communities. Lawyers for the state of Louisiana, a group of ‘non-African American voters’, and the administration of Donald Trump argue the court should strike down the state’s 2024 map. If accepted, the decision could make race-based redistricting challenges far harder to pursue nationwide.